Mrs. Preston-Werner says here (https://medium.com/p/2fe173c44215 ) that the accusation and reason is that: "We learned that unnamed employees felt pressured by Tom and me to work pro-bono for my nonprofit."
Results of the GitHub Investigation
51–60 of 514 posts
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#52There appear to have been weirdnesses around the investigation, such as Julie Ann Horvath (and other ex-employees) remaining uncontacted until it was wrapping up: https://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/453298152569720832 So I don't know how much stock you can place behind the idea that the investigators GH hired, who did not contact ex-employees competently, found them blameless. The resignation probably speaks for mor…
So, remember that what Julie says about them not contacting her is itself, and allegation. Her picture proves nothing, after all. Your conclusion about "how much stock to place" does not follow, since this allegation has not been proven true. Having been involved in this sort of thing before, both on the "asked to investigate" and "asked to play witness for an employee side", i'd say the truth always lies somewhere i…
[deleted]
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#53> The investigation found no evidence to support the claims [...] of a sexist or hostile work environment. So, are they saying that Horvath was lying? I mean, there was a lot of specific stuff she mentioned that seemed inappropriate. I don't want to get into whether the behavior was "sexist" or not, but I think we can all agree that if what she said was true, the work environment was hostile and unprofessional.
Note that the denial is couched in the terminology "there was no legal wrongdoing". Not that there was no wrongdoing, just nothing blatant enough (or which left evidence) that it broke laws.
No, the denial says "no evidence exists to support the claim". That's a direct and testable assertion, not weasel words.
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#54And this is why you need strong/clear HR policies.
Sure, at their size now. Not before, as policy beyond "use good judgement" at a small company is basically pointless. Your first dozen hires must all be good enough to write such policies...
FWIW, Github hasn't been a "small company" for quite some time. github.com/about/team says they are currently at 237 employees.
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Theresa Preston-Werner's response https://medium.com/p/2fe173c44215
[deleted]
No, that's saying that Tom Preston-Werner was exonerated, and that a different problem surfaced during the investigation. It is not necessary for Horvath to have lied for that to be the conclusion reached. Misunderstandings happen.
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#56It sounds like Mrs. Preston-Werner was a regular presence at the GitHub office and, according to Horvath, had extensive access to private information throughout GitHub's systems despite the fact that she wasn't an employee. If true, that should certainly be a privacy and security concern to any GitHub customer or user.
This is incredibly troubling. How can anyone trust GitHub, knowing that non-employees regularly had access to private information?
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#57To me this is lawyer speak for, yes it is true but if we admit, we would be liable. I would expect something like this from Bank of America or some other mega-corp, not github.
Only good thing about this is that it is not happening on the front pages of TechCrunch and whatever else blog might be following events like this.
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#58> The investigation found no evidence to support the claims [...] of a sexist or hostile work environment. So, are they saying that Horvath was lying? I mean, there was a lot of specific stuff she mentioned that seemed inappropriate. I don't want to get into whether the behavior was "sexist" or not, but I think we can all agree that if what she said was true, the work environment was hostile and unprofessional.
So, are they saying that Horvath was lying?
Neither party has to be lying. She might honestly believe she was treated in a specific way because of her sex, while others may have treated her in a specific way because of, for instance, her competence. Both may be 100% honest in their assessment of the relationship, yet be completely at odds.
The workplace absolutely sounded unprofessional, which often means the entire gradient of behaviour from welcoming to hostile (versus the normal corporate realm of gray areas in between). Indeed, unprofessional workplaces are generally celebrated in the tech community, often for good reason.
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#59Kicked out of his own company? Reminds me of Apple and SJ... Hopefully Tom will see a great future and make some out of the blue return.
Re: Results of the GitHub Investigation
#60> The investigation found no evidence to support the claims [...] of a sexist or hostile work environment. So, are they saying that Horvath was lying? I mean, there was a lot of specific stuff she mentioned that seemed inappropriate. I don't want to get into whether the behavior was "sexist" or not, but I think we can all agree that if what she said was true, the work environment was hostile and unprofessional.
I think it's possible that Horvath was right about the poor actions of management, and at the same time, very little of what she alleged seemed to fall into the bounds of gender-based discrimination. A colleague who reverts your commits because you wouldn't date him...that's not gender-based, that's office-romance strife (though obviously, such strife can be exacerbated with a gender imbalance at the company). I'm ki…
How is a woman who refuses to date another employee considered an "office-romance?" Retaliation as a result of unwanted advances is considered harassment.
sexual harassment definition: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm